ABSTRACT
Once considered an incurable disease, the continuous evolution of technologies and techniques has improved both oncological outcomes and quality of life for patients with rectal cancer. Multiport laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is the standard of care in many institutions and countries and is the approach that has been most subjected to controlled trial. Following a number of randomized trials as well as large series and registry reports and several Cochrane reviews, there is no evidence of any oncological disadvantage to laparoscopic surgery compared with the open approach and there is good evidence of improved short-term outcomes and some evidence of improved long-term outcomes. We describe the "standard" approach to multiport, laparoscopic low anterior resection.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Laparoscopy/methods , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Adenocarcinoma/therapy , Chemoradiotherapy , Combined Modality Therapy , Humans , Laparoscopes , Laparotomy/methods , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Patient Positioning , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Rectal Neoplasms/therapy , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Treatment Outcome , Watchful WaitingABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of CT angiography (CTA) for the assessment of carotid bifurcation stenosis, using interactive volume rendering (VR), maximum intensity projection (MIP), and 2D transverse CT technique (t-CT). METHOD: Nineteen consecutive patients were prospectively studied with CTA and selective digital subtraction angiography (DSA). There were 13 men and 6 women from 51 to 84 years old (mean 70 years). Results of DSA were compared with those of interactive VR, MIP, and conventional t-CT results, using North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial criteria for stenosis grading. RESULTS: There were a total of 38 carotid bifurcations studied, with 9 mild, 10 moderate, and 15 severe stenoses and 4 occlusions. Overall agreement with DSA for VR was achieved in 76%. Eighty percent of the severe stenoses were correctly predicted by VR. The overall agreement between t-CT and DSA was 89%. MIP images, when analyzed independently, showed an overall agreement with angiography of only 71%. VR was not significantly different from MIP (p = 0.60). The difference between VR and t-CT had borderline significance (p = 0.09). MIP had significantly poorer agreement with angiography than t-CT (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: CTA has a high degree of accuracy for the assessment of carotid artery disease compared with catheter angiography. Interactive VR increases the accuracy of diagnosing carotid stenosis and decreases the number of unsatisfactory studies as compared with MIP. Further advances in computation speeds and improvements in software may dramatically alter the future use of VR for the communication of results to clinicians; however, careful analysis of transverse sections is essential to accurate CT interpretation.
